Wearable Inertial Sensors for Field-Based Lower Limb Biomechanical Assessment in Soccer Players: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Background: Lower limb injuries are a major concern in soccer due to sprinting, deceleration, cutting, change of direction, jumping, landing, and kicking demands. Laboratory based biomechanical assessment provides high accuracy, but it is often less practical for capturing real on field movement demands. Wearable inertial sensors offer a portable alternative; however, evidence regarding their use remains heterogeneous. Objective: This systematic literature review aimed to synthesize how wearable inertial sensors have been used to assess lower limb biomechanics in soccer players, the movement tasks and biomechanical parameters measured, and the evidence regarding their validity, reliability, and practical applicability for injury risk screening and return to play assessment. Methods: A literature search was conducted in Scopus using terms related to wearable inertial sensors, soccer, lower limb, biomechanics, injury risk, rehabilitation, and return to play. The selection process followed PRISMA 2020. From 155 records, 26 empirical studies were included. Extracted data covered study design, participants, sensor type and placement, measurement setting, movement tasks, biomechanical parameters, practical applications, and key findings. Methodological quality was assessed using the JBI Analytical Cross Sectional Checklist. Results: Included studies used IMUs, accelerometers, GPS accelerometer systems, and other wearable sensors placed on the trunk, pelvis, thigh, shank, tibia, foot, and ankle. Dominant tasks included cutting, change of direction, sprinting, running, jumping, landing, hopping, and rehabilitation tasks. Main parameters included joint kinematics, tibial acceleration, PlayerLoad, loading response, joint load, asymmetry, and centre of pressure variables. Conclusion: Wearable inertial sensors are useful for supporting biomechanical screening, workload monitoring, rehabilitation, and return to play assessment, but they are not yet sufficient as standalone injury prediction tools. Future research should standardize protocols, validation procedures, reliability testing, and prospective study designs.